The ABC allows comments on some of our articles, as a space for you to contribute your thoughts about news events and participate in civil conversations about topical issues.

All comments are moderated and we make no guarantees that your contribution will be published.

Reply

Author

Email

Date/Time

10 Dec 2016 2:45:16am

Text

PreviousMessage

What does "science fairing" mean? I hope it not to be a misspelling of science fearing, because fear is the last thing I think ought to be associated with science. So if the question becomes one of whether we can scientifically interrogate first hand accounts of anything then I think there may be some answers for you.

We can look at how notoriously inaccurate eyewitness accounts can be especially over time and by process of oral history, what with the books of scripture having been penned a generation afterwards at least.

But before we even do that then by all means discount the eyewitness accounts associated with any number of other belief systems and superstitions, tell me that so called psychics aren't using cold reading and we'll take James Randi's money while we're at it. Then we can talk about whether belief and science are truly reconciled to one another. Otherwise what we may just have are belief systems that aren't necessarily amenable to reason but are nevertheless occasionally respected as a social norm in tolerant societies.

So I'd agree that being dismissive seems like a fairly unproductive approach to anything, yet I'd throw in the caveat than failing to dismiss some alternative account of reality isn't the same as embracing an unreality. I think we'll continue to regard people who're too heavily vested in their cyber pseudo-selves as delusional just as we might those who indulge in superstitions. Somewhere in between we make social allowances for certain norms of belief without necessarily sharing all of them. That's not something I think we should be so uncomfortable about as to be unable to have a joke :)